1. BACKGROUND

1.1 An application (No. ESB-072/2001) for an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) study brief under section 5(1) of the Environmental Impact Assessment Ordinance (EIAO) was submitted by the Applicant on 17.4.2001 with a project profile (No. PP-124/2001) (the Project Profile).

1.2 The Project Profile proposed to provide a Permanent Aviation Fuel Facility for the airport to ensure a secure means of aviation fuel supply for the operational life of the airport. A permanent site is also required in order to replace the existing temporary Aviation Fuel Receiving Facility just off Sha Chau. Once the Permanent Aviation Fuel Facility is commissioned, the facility at Sha Chau will revert to an emergency back-up.

1.3 The Permanent Aviation Fuel facility is planned to be located off-airport and will consist of:

a) A jetty with two berths, each able to accommodate 10,000 to 60,000 dwt vessels,
b) A gross aviation fuel tankage capacity of approximately 100,000 cubic metres in 2004 increasing in stages to match the anticipated growth in aviation fuel uplift to an ultimate gross tankage capacity of approximately 400,000 cubic metres,
c) Pumps and associated facilities, and
d) Pipelines to transfer the fuel to the aviation fuel system on the airport.

1.4 The tank farm will occupy a land area adjacent to the jetty and there will be a twin pipeline connecting the facility to the airport pipeline system, which is likely to be buried at 3m below the seabed with suitable rock-armour protection.

1.5 The conceptual arrangement of the aviation fuel facilities at Tuen Mun Area 38 is shown on Drawing No. PPM/000/C/001 in the Project Profile. Two options for the aviation fuel submarine pipeline route will be evaluated: i) connection to the existing facility at Sha Chau; ii) connection directly to the existing airport "western connection".

1.6 Pursuant to section 5(7)(a) of the EIAO, the Director of Environmental Protection (the Director) issues this EIA study brief to the Applicant to carry out an EIA study for the Project.

1.7 The purpose of the EIA study is to provide information on the nature and extent of environmental impacts arising from the construction and operation of the Project and related activities that take place concurrently. This information will contribute to decisions by the Director on :

(i) the overall acceptability of any adverse environmental consequences that are likely to arise as a result of the Project;

(ii) the conditions and requirements for the detailed design, construction and operation of the Project to mitigate against adverse environmental consequences wherever practicable; and

(iii) the acceptability of residual impacts after the proposed mitigation measures are implemented.

2. OBJECTIVES OF THE EIA STUDY

2.1 The objectives of the EIA study are as follows:

(i) to describe the Project and associated works together with the requirements for carrying out the Project;
(ii) to identify and describe elements of community and environment likely to be affected by the Project and/or likely to cause adverse impacts to the Project, including natural and man-made environment and the associated environmental constraints;
(iii) to provide information on the consideration of alternatives to avoid and minimize the environmental impacts, in particular the Sha Chau and Lung Kwu Chau Marine Parks and the habitat of the Chinese White Dolphins at the North Lantau waters.
(iv) to identify and quantify emission sources and determine the significance of impacts on sensitive receivers and potential affected uses;
(v) to identify and quantify any potential landscape and visual impacts and to propose measures to mitigate these impacts;
(vi) to identify and quantify any potential impact to marine ecology and to propose measures to mitigate these impacts
(vii) to identify any negative impacts on site of cultural heritage and to propose measures to mitigate these impacts;
(viii) to identify any negative impacts on fisheries and to propose measures to mitigate the impacts;
(ix) to identify the risk due to the transportation and storage of the aviation fuel and to propose measures to mitigate the impact;
(x) to propose the provision of mitigation measures so as to minimize pollution, environmental disturbance and nuisance during construction and operation of the Project;
(xi) to investigate the feasibility, effectiveness and implications of the proposed mitigation measures
(xii) to identify, predict and evaluate the residual environmental impacts (i.e. after practicable mitigation) and the cumulative effects expected to arise during the construction and operation phases of the Project in relation to the sensitive receivers and potential affected uses;
(xiii) to identify, assess and specify methods, measures and standards, to be included in the detailed design, construction and operation of the Project which are necessary to mitigate the identified environmental impacts and cumulative effects and reduce them to acceptable levels;
(xiv) to investigate the extent of the secondary environmental impacts that may arise from the proposed mitigation measures and to identify constraints associated with the mitigation measures recommended in the EIA study, as well as the provision of any necessary modification; and
(xv) to design and specify environmental monitoring and audit requirements to ensure the effective implementation of the recommended environmental protection and pollution control measures.

3. DETAILED REQUIREMENTS OF THE EIA STUDY

3.1 The purpose of this study brief is to scope the key issues of the EIA study. The Applicant has to demonstrate in the EIA report that the criteria in the relevant sections of the Technical Memorandum on the Environmental Impact Assessment Process of the Environmental Impact Assessment Ordinance (hereinafter referred to as "the TM") are fully complied with.

3.2 The Scope

3.2.1 The scope of this EIA study covers the project mentioned in section 1.3 to 1.5 above. The EIA study shall address any key issues identified during the course of the study and the cumulative environmental impacts of the Project, through interaction or in combination with other existing, committed and planned developments in the vicinity of the Project, including the adjoining industrial estates and recycling industries.

3.3 Technical Requirements

The Applicant shall conduct the EIA study to address all environmental aspects of the activities as described in the scope as set out above. The EIA study shall include the following technical requirements on specific impacts.

3.3.1 Alternative Consideration

3.3.1.1 The EIA study shall take into consideration with clear and objective comparison of the environmental benefits and disbenefits of different sitings and alignment options, and also with or without the proposed developments. The applicant shall compare the main environmental impacts and provide reasons for selecting the proposed system and the part environmental factors played in the selection shall be described. This is particularly relevant to the size and location of the facility, submarine pipeline alignment, construction method, number and size of the fuel tanks and piers. In formulating the preferred options, the Applicant shall seek to avoid adverse environmental effects to the maximum practicable extent.

3.3.1.2 The Applicant shall consider alternatives (ie, submarine pipeline alignment) to avoid or minimize any potential impacts to the ecologically valuable habitats, including Sha Chau and Lung Kwu Chau Marine Park and the habitat of the Indo-Pacific Hump-Backed Dolphin.

3.3.2 Cumulative Environmental Impact

The Applicant shall assess and evaluate the cumulative environmental impacts arising from the project and other planned development in its vicinity. Findings of relevant environmental studies shall be reviewed and incorporated into the EIA Report.

3.3.3 Air Quality Impact

General Requirement

3.3.3.1. The Applicant shall follow the criteria and guidelines for evaluating and assessing air quality impact as stated in section 1 of Annex 4 and Annex 12 of the TM respectively.

3.3.3.2 The assessment area for air quality impact shall generally be defined by a distance of 500 m from the boundary of the project site, yet it may be extended depending on the circumstances and the scale of the project.

3.3.3.3. The Applicant shall assess the air pollutant concentrations in accordance with the latest set of Guidelines for Local-Scale Air Quality Assessment Using Models issued by the Environmental Protection Department, HKSAR. (ref. EPD's home page under items for Air - http://www.info.gov.hk/epd) or other methodology as agreed by the Director.

Impact Assessment

3.3.3.4 The air quality impact assessment shall include the following:

Background and analysis of activities

(i) Provide background information relating to air quality issues relevant to the project, e.g. description of the types of activities during construction stage of the project such as reclamation that will likely give rise to dust emissions and those activities during operation stage of the project such as emission of benzene and odour from fuel tanks.

(ii) Give an account, where appropriate, of the consideration/measures that had been taken into consideration in the planning of the project to abate the air pollution impact. That is, the Applicant should consider alternative construction methods/phasing programmes to minimize the constructional air quality impact.

(iii) Present the background air quality levels in the assessment area for the purpose of evaluating the cumulative constructional and operational air quality impacts.

Identification of ASRs and examination of emission/dispersion characteristics

(iv) Identify and describe representative existing and planned/committed air sensitive receivers (ASRs) that would likely be affected by the project. The Applicant shall select the assessment points of the identified ASRs such that they represent the worst impact point of these ASRs. A map showing the location and a description including the name of the buildings, their uses and height of the selected assessment points shall be given. The separation distances of these ASRs from the nearest emission sources should also be given.

(v) Provide an exhaustive list of air pollutant emission sources, including any nearby emission sources which are likely to have impact on the project based on the analysis of the constructional and operational activities of the project in (i) above. Examples of constructional stage emission sources include stock piling, blasting, concrete batching and vehicular movements on unpaved haul roads on site,......etc. Examples of operational stage emission sources include emission of benzene and odour from fuel tanks, ......etc. Confirmation of the validity of the assumptions and the magnitude of the activities (e.g. volume of construction materials handled etc.) shall be obtained from the relevant government department/authorities and documented.

Constructional air quality impact

(vi) The Applicant shall follow the requirements of the Air Pollution Control (Construction Dust) Regulation in dust control to ensure construction dust impacts are controlled within the relevant standards as stipulated in section 1 of Annex 4 of the TM. An audit and monitoring program during constructional stage shall be initiated to verify the effectiveness of the control measures and to ensure that the construction dust levels be brought under control.

(vii) If the Applicant anticipates a significant construction dust impact that will likely cause exceedance of the recommended limits in the TM at the ASRs despite incorporation of the dust control measures stated in (vi) above, a quantitative assessment should be carried out to evaluate the construction dust impact at the identified ASRs based on the emission strength of the emission sources identified in (v) above. The Applicant shall follow (ix) to (xiii) below when carrying out the quantitative assessment.

Operational air quality impact

(viii) The Applicant shall calculate the expected air pollutant concentrations at the identified ASRs. Calculations for the expected impact shall be based on an assumed reasonably worst case scenario. The evaluation shall be based on the strength of the emission sources identified in (v) above. The Applicant shall follow (ix) to (xiii) below when carrying out the quantitative assessment.

Quantitative Assessment Methodology

(ix) The Applicant shall apply the general principles enunciated in the modelling guidelines (paragraph 3.3.3.3 above) while making allowance for the specific characteristic of each project. This specific methodology must be documented in such level of details (preferably with tables and diagrams) to allow the readers of the assessment report to grasp how the model is set up to simulate the situation at hand without referring to the model input files. Details of the calculation of the emission rates of air pollutants for input to the modelling shall be presented in the report. The Applicant must ensure consistency between the text description and the model files at every stage of submission. Applicant is advised to obtain prior agreement of the general methodology from the Director before commencement of the assessments.

(x) The Applicant shall, based on the nature of the activities analyzed in (v) above, identify the key/representative air pollutant parameters (types of pollutants and the averaging time concentration) to be evaluated and provide explanation for choosing these parameters for the assessment of the impact of the project.

(xi) The Applicant shall calculate the cumulative air quality impact at the identified ASRs and compare these results against the criteria set out in section 1 of Annex 4 in the TM. The predicted air quality impacts (both unmitigated and mitigated) shall be presented in the form of summary table and pollution contours, for comparison with relevant air quality standards and examination of the land use implications of these impacts. Plans of suitable scale should be used for presentation of pollution contour for determining buffer distances required.

Mitigating measures for non-compliance

(xii) The Applicant shall propose remedies and mitigating measures where the predicted air quality impact exceeds the criteria set in section 1 of Annex 4 in the TM. These measures and any constraints on future land use planning shall be agreed with the relevant government departments/authorities and documented. The Applicant shall demonstrate quantitatively that the resultant impacts after incorporation of the proposed mitigating measures will comply the criteria stipulated in section 1 of Annex 4 in the TM.

Submission of model files

(xiii) All input and output file(s) of the model run(s) shall be submitted to the Director in electronic format.

3.3.4 Noise Impact

3.3.4.1 The Applicant shall follow the criteria and guidelines for evaluating and assessing noise impact as stated in Annexes 5 and 13 of the TM respectively.

3.3.4.2 The noise impact assessment shall include the following:

(i) Determination of Assessment Area

The noise impact assessment shall include all areas within 300m from the project boundary. Subject to the agreement of the Director, the assessment area could be reduced accordingly if the first layer of noise sensitive receivers, closer than 300m from the project boundary, provides acoustic shielding to those receivers located further away.

(ii) Provision of Background Information

The Applicant shall provide all background information relevant to the project including relevant previous and current studies. Unless involved in the planning standards, no existing noise levels are particularly required.

(iii) Identification of Noise Sensitive Receivers

(a) The Applicant shall refer to Annex 13 of the TM when identifying the noise sensitive receivers (NSRs). The NSRs shall include all existing ones and all planned or committed noise sensitive developments and uses.

(b) The Applicant shall select assessment points to represent all identified NSRs for carrying out quantitative noise assessment described below. The assessment points shall be agreed with the Director prior to the quantitative noise assessment. A map showing the location and description including name of building, use, and floors of each and every selected assessment point shall be given.

(iv) Provision of an Emission Inventory of the Noise Sources

The Applicant shall provide an inventory of noise sources including construction equipment for construction noise assessment; fixed plant equipment for operational noise assessment. Confirmation of the validity of the inventory shall be obtained from the relevant government departments/authorities.

(v) Construction Noise Assessment

(a) The Applicant shall carry out assessment of noise impact from construction (excluding percussive piling) of the project during day time, i.e. 7 a.m. to 7 p.m., on weekdays other than general holidays in accordance with the methodology stipulated in paragraphs 5.3. and 5.4 of Annex 13 of the TM. The criteria in Table 1B of Annex 5 of the TM shall be adopted in the assessment.

(b) To minimize the construction noise impact, alternative construction methods to replace percussive piling shall be proposed as far as practicable. As helicopters will be used for construction, the selection of the flight path shall consider to minimize any possible disturbance to noise sensitive receivers.

(c) If the unmitigated construction noise levels are found to exceed the relevant criteria, the Applicant shall propose practicable direct mitigation measures (including movable barriers, enclosures, quieter alternative methods, re-scheduling and restricting hours of operation of noisy tasks) to minimize the impact. If the mitigated noise levels still exceed the relevant criteria, the duration of the noise exceedance shall be given.

3.3.5 Water Quality Impact

3.3.5.1 The Applicant shall follow the criteria and guidelines for evaluating and assessing water pollution as stated in Annexes 6 and 14 of the TM, respectively.

3.3.5.2 All physical, chemical and biological disruptions of marine, estuarine, fresh water or ground water system(s) arising during the construction, operation of the project shall be identified and analyzed in the impact assessment (including any disruption to the operation of the existing submarine outfalls, ie. Pillar Point Submarine outfall and Lung Kwu Tan outfall).

3.3.5.3 The water quality impact assessment shall address the followings:

(i) Collection and review of background information on the existing water system(s);

(ii) Characterization of water quality based on existing information or site surveys/tests as appropriate;

(iii) Identification and analysis of all existing and planned future activities and beneficial uses related to the water system(s) and identification of all water sensitive receivers;

(iv) Description of anticipated activity levels of fuel vessels during the operational stage;

(v) Identification of pertinent water quality objectives and establishment of other appropriate water quality criteria or standards for the water system(s) and all the sensitive receivers;

(vi) Review the specific construction methods and configurations (e.g., the submarine pipeline laying method and alignment);

(vii) Identification, analysis and quantification of all existing and likely future water pollution sources, including point discharges and non-point sources to surface water runoff. Field investigation and laboratory tests shall be conducted as appropriate. Establishment and provision of an emission inventory on the quantities and characteristics of all these pollution sources.

(viii) Prediction and quantification, by mathematical modelling, of the impacts on the water system(s) and the sensitive recievers due to the construction and operation of the aviation fuel facility. Possible impacts include changes in hydrology, flow regime, sediment erosion or deposition, water and sediment quality and the effects on the marine mammal and aquatic organisms due to such changes. The prediction shall include possible different construction stages or sequences, and different operation stages. For operation stage assessment, potential locations, quantities and rates of fuel spill should be identified and quantified. The fuel spill modelling assessment should cover combinations of different tides, wind and season conditions. Affected sensitive receivers should be identified by the assessment tool with indications of degree of severity. The water quality model used shall comply with the following specification:

Modeling software general

(a) The modeling software shall be fully 3-dimensional capable of accurately simulating the stratified condition, salinity transport, and effect of wind and tide within the model area.

(b) The modeling software shall consist of hydrodynamic, water quality and particle dispersion modules. The hydrodynamic and water quality modules shall have been proven with successful applications locally and overseas.

(c) The hydrodynamic and water quality modules shall be strictly mass conserved at all levels.

(d) The assessment and modeling tool for oil spill events should be quantitative with proven applications locally or overseas.

Model details - Calibration & Validation

(e) No field data collection is required for model calibration for this study. However, the models shall be properly calibrated and validated before its use in this study in the marine waters in the area including Western Buffer, North Western, North Western Supplementary and Deep Bay Water Control Zones defined under the Water Pollution Control Ordinance, and the Pearl Estuary, with the field data collected by:

• Hydraulic and Water Quality Studies in Victoria Harbour (1987)
• Port and Airport Development Strategy - Enhancement of WAHMO Mathematical Models (1990)
• Strategic Sewage Disposal Scheme Stage II - Oceanic Outfall, Oceanographic Surveys and Modeling (1992)
• Update on Cumulative Water Quality and Hydrological Effect of Coastal Developments and Upgrading of Assessment Tool (1998)
• EPD's routine monitoring data
• Tidal data from HK Observatory, Macau and relevant Mainland Authorities.

(f) Tidal data shall be calibrated and validated in both frequency and time domain manner.

(g) For the purpose of calibration and validation, the model shall run for not less than 15 days of real sequence of tide (excluding model spin up) in both dry and wet seasons with due consideration of the time required to establish initial conditions.

(h) In general the hydrodynamic models shall be calibrated to the following criteria:

Model details - Simulation

(i) The suspended solids model for assessing impacts of sediment loss due to marine works shall incorporate the processes of settling, deposition and erosion. Contaminants release and DO depletion during dredging and backfilling shall be simulated by the model. The fuel spill model should cover combinations of different tides, wind and season conditions to predict the degree of severity at affected sensitive receivers.

(j) The water quality modeling results shall be qualitatively explainable, and any identifiable trend and variations in water quality shall be reproduced by the model. The water quality model shall simulate and take account of the interaction of dissolved oxygen, suspended solids, contaminants release of dredged and disposed material, and benthic processes. It shall also simulate salinity. Salinity results simulated by hydrodynamic models and water quality models shall be demonstrated to be consistent. The fuel spill model shall cover the transport, dispersion and degradation of the fuel spill.

(k) The models shall at least cover the eastern Pearl Estuary and Water Control Zones identified in above to incorporate all major influences on hydrodynamic and water quality.

(l) In general, grid size at the area affected by the project shall be less than 400 m in open waters and less than 75 m around sensitive receivers. The grid schematisation shall be agreed with EPD. All models shall either be dynamically linked to a far field model or form part of a larger model by gradual grid refinement. The regional model shall at least cover the Hong Kong waters, the Pearl Estuary and the Lema Channel to incorporate all major influences on hydrodynamic and water quality.

Modeling assessment

(m) Scenarios to be assessed shall cover all phases of development being considered. Corresponding pollution load, bathymetry and coastline shall be adopted in the model set up.

(n) Hydrodynamic and water quality models shall be run for (with proper model spin up) at least a real sequence of 15 days spring-neap tidal cycle in both dry season and wet season.

(o) The results shall be assessed for compliance of Water Quality Objectives. Any changes in hydrodynamic regime shall be assessed. Daily sedimentation rate shall be computed and its ecological impact shall be assessed.

(p) Assess the predicted impacts on all sensitive receivers.

(q) Cumulative impacts due to other projects, activities or pollution sources within a boundary, subject to the agreement of the Director, shall also be predicted and quantified.

(r) All modeling input data and results shall be submitted in digital media to EPD.

(ix) identification and quantification of all dredging, fill extraction, filling, mud/sediment transportation and disposal activities and requirements. Potential fill source and dumping ground to be involved shall also be identified. Field investigation, sampling and chemical and biological laboratory tests to characterize the sediment/mud concerned shall be conducted as appropriate. The ranges of parameters to be analyzed; the number, type and methods of sampling; sample preservation; chemical and biological laboratory test method; and the laboratory to be used shall be subject to the approval of the Director. Any seriously contaminated sediment which requires special treatment and/or disposal arrangement in accordance with WBTC No.3/2000 shall be identified by both chemical and biological tests. If the presence of such sediment is confirmed, the Applicant shall identify the most appropriate treatment and/or disposal arrangement and demonstrate its feasibility.

(x) Prediction and quantification of the impacts on the water system(s) and the sensitive receivers due to the construction work in (v) and the pollution sources identified in (vi). The prediction shall take into account and include likely different construction stages or sequences, different operation stages.

(xi) Cumulative impacts due to other projects; activities or pollution sources within a boundary around the Study Area to be agreed by EPD shall also be predicted and quantified.

Waste Water and Non-point Sources Pollution

(xii) Analysis on the provision and adequacy of existing and planned future facilities to reduce pollution arising from the non-point sources identified in (vi).

(xiii) Proposal of effective and practicable upgrading or provision, water pollution prevention and mitigation measures to be implemented during the construction, operation stages so as reduce the water quality impacts to within acceptable levels of standards. Requirements to be incorporated in the project contract document shall also be proposed. All practical methods or procedures to reduce pollution from the construction and operation of the project shall be studied.

(xiv) Best management practices to reduce storm water and non-point source pollution shall be investigated and proposed as appropriate. Attention shall be made to the water quality control and mitigation measures recommended in the ProPECC paper on construction site drainage.

(xv) Evaluation and quantification of residual impacts on the water system(s) and the sensitive receivers with regard to the appropriate water quality criteria, standards or guidelines.

3.3.6 Waste Management Implications

3.3.6.1 The Applicant shall follow the criteria and guidelines for evaluating and assessing waste management implications as stated in Annexes 7 and 15 of the TM, respectively.

3.3.6.2 The assessment of waste management implications shall cover the following :

(i) Analysis of Activities and Waste Generation

The Applicant shall identify the quantity, quality and timing of the waste arising as a result of the construction and operation activities, based on the sequence and duration of these activities.

(ii) Proposal for Waste Management

(a) Prior to considering the disposal options for various types of wastes, the Applicant shall fully evaluate opportunities for reducing waste generation and on-site or off-site reuse shall be fully evaluated. Measures which can be taken in the planning and design stages, e.g. by modifying the design approach and in the construction stage for maximizing waste reduction shall be separately considered.

(b) After taken into account all the opportunities for reducing waste generation and maximizing reuse, the Applicant shall estimate the types and quantities of the wastes required to be disposed of as a consequence and describe the disposal options for each type of waste in detail. The disposal options for each type of wastes shall take into account the result of the assessment in (c) below.

(c) The impact caused by handling (including labeling, packaging & storage), collection, and disposal of wastes shall be addressed in detail and appropriate mitigation measures shall be proposed. This assessment shall cover the following areas :

- potential hazard;
- air and odour emissions;
- noise;
- wastewater discharge; and
- public transport.

3.3.7 Ecological Impact (Aquatic)

3.3.7.1 The Applicant shall follow the criteria and guidelines for evaluating and assessing ecological impact as stated in Annexes 8 and 16 of the TM, respectively.

3.3.7.2 The assessment area for the purpose of this ecological impact assessment shall include the Sha Chau and Lung Kwu Chau Marine Park and all areas within 500 m distance from the project area including any pipeline alignment, areas with frequent vessels movement during the operational phase and any other areas likely to be impacted by the project.

3.3.7.3 The project shall avoid impacts on the prawns and fish spawning ground, recognized sites of conservation importance and other ecological sensitive areas including the Sha Chau and Lung Kwu Chau Marine Park and the habitat for the Indo-Pacific Hump-Backed Dolphin. The assessment shall identify and quantify as far as possible the potential ecological impacts during the construction and operation of the project and should evaluate the environmental acceptability of the proposed project.

3.3.7.4 The assessment shall include the following:

(i) review the finding of relevant studies and collate all the available information regarding the ecological characters;

(ii) evaluate the information collected and identify any information gap relating to the assessment of potential ecological impacts to the aquatic environment;

(iii) carry out necessary field surveys which shall cover the wet season (the duration of which shall be at least six months) and investigations to verify the information collected in (ii), fill the information gaps identified and fulfill the objectives of the EIA study;

(iv) establish the general ecological profile and describe the characteristics of each habitat found; major information to be provided shall include:

(a) description of the physical environment;

(b) habitat maps of suitable scale (1:1000 to 1:5000) showing the types and locations of habitats in the assessment area;

(c) ecological characteristics of each habitat type such as size, type, species present, dominant species found, species diversity and abundance, community structure, seasonality and inter-dependence of the habitats and species, and presence of any features of ecological importance;

(d) representative color photos of each habitat type and any important ecological features identified;

(e) investigate and describe the existing wildlife uses of various habitats with special attention to those habitats with conservation interests;

(f) species found that are rare, endangered and/or listed under local legislation, international conventions for conservation of wildlife/habitats or red data books;

(v) describe all recognized sites of conservation importance in the assessment area and how these sites will be affected by the proposed development;

(vi) using suitable methodology, identify and quantify as far as possible, any direct, indirect, on-site, off-site, primary, secondary and cumulative ecological impacts such as destruction of habitats, reduction of species abundance/diversity, loss of feeding and breeding grounds, reduction of ecological carrying capacity and habitat fragmentation; and in particular the following:

a) impact of habitat disturbance associated with dredging and backfilling of the pipline route;

b) impact of habitat loss and disturbance to wildlife arising from any works carried out in the Sha Chau and Lung Kwu Chau Marine Park,

c) impact on hard and soft bottom assemblages as well as other marine organism; and

d) impacts upon resources of conversation importance during operations including spillage, maintenance as well as assessed hazard risks;

(vii) assess the impacts on Chinese White Dolphins (Sousa chinensis)

a) review and incorporate the findings of relevant studies including the previous dolphins studies and collate all the available information regarding the ecological characters of the "Assessment Area" ;

b) evaluate the information collected and identify any information gap relating to the assessment of potential impacts on the Chinese White Dolphins;

c) carry out necessary field surveys and investigations to fill the information gaps identified, if any, and to fulfil the objectives of the EIA study;

d) assess the impacts on Chinese White Dolphin due to disturbance, loss of habitat and food supply;

e) present all relevant survey findings including previous surveys conducted in relevant studies together with surveys carried out under this study;

f) assess the cumulative impacts on the dolphins due to this project and any nearby dredging/reclamation works and other existing or planned projects during construction;

g) assess the disturbance of the dolphins' habitat and the risk of dolphins being hit but vessel traffic in the vicinity of the facility during operation;

h) identify precautionary and mitigation measures for protection of the Chinese White Dolphins. The proposed measures shall include those recommended in previous EIA studies and dolphins studies, such as ecological monitoring on the dolphins during construction phase.

(viii) evaluate the significance and acceptability of the ecological impacts identified using well-defined criteria;

(ix) recommend all possible alternatives and practicable mitigation measures to avoid, minimize and/or compensate for the adverse ecological impacts identified, in particular:

- pipeline alignment that avoid Sha Chau and Lung Kwu Chau Marine park shall be considered, with the alternatives compared and their relative impacts included;
- construction of the project at times that minimize impacts on the Chinese White Dolphin shall be considered, with the relative impacts of alternative schedules included: and
- reinstatement of any habitats in the Sha Chau and Lung Kwu Chau Marine Park temporarily affected by the proposed development and enhancement of existing lower quality habitats otherwise unaffected by the project.

(x) evaluate the feasibility and effectiveness of the recommended mitigation measures and define the scope, type, location, implementation arrangement, subsequent management and maintenance of such measures;

(xi) determine and quantify the residual ecological impacts after implementation of the proposed mitigation measures;

(xii) evaluate the severity and acceptability of the residual ecological impacts using well-defined criteria; and

(xiii) review the need for and recommend any ecological monitoring programme, in particular on the Chinese White Dolphins during the construction and operation phase.

3.3.8 Landscape and Visual Impact

3.3.8.1 The Applicant shall follow the criteria and guidelines for evaluating and assessing landscape and visual impacts for any above ground structures and work areas as stated in Annexes 10 and 18 of the TM, respectively. Both construction and operation impacts shall be assessed.

3.3.8.2 The assessment area for the landscape impact assessment shall include all areas within a 500m distance from the Project. The assessment area for the visual impact assessment shall be defined by the visual envelope from the Project which is generally the viewshed formed by natural/man-made features such as ridgeline and building blocks.

3.3.8.3 The Applicant shall describe, appraise, analyze and evaluate the existing landscape resource and character of the assessment area. A system shall be derived for judging landscape and visual impact significance as required under the TM. The sensitivity of the landscape framework and its ability to accommodate change shall be particularly focused on. The Applicant shall identify the degree of compatibility of the Project with the existing landscape and planned landscape setting. The assessment shall quantify the potential landscape impacts as far as possible, so as to illustrate the significance of such impacts arising from the Project. Clear mapping of the landscape impact is required.

3.3.8.4 The Applicant shall assess the visual impacts of the Project. Clear illustrations of visual impact are required. The assessment shall include the following:

(i) Identification and plotting of visual envelope of the Project within the assessment area;

(ii) Identification of the key groups of sensitive receivers within the visual envelope and their views at both ground level and sea level and elevated vantage points;

(iii) Description of the visual compatibility of the Project with the surrounding, and the planned setting and its obstruction and interference with the key views of the adjacent areas; and

(iv) The severity of visual impacts in terms of nature, distances and number of sensitive receivers. Nighttime glare shall be considered in the assessment. The visual impacts of the Project with and without mitigation measures shall also be included so as to demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed mitigation measures.

3.3.8.5 Alternative construction methods, alignment and design that would avoid or reduce the identified landscape and visual impacts shall be evaluated for comparison before adopting other mitigation or compensatory measures to alleviate the impacts. The mitigation measures proposed shall not only be concerned with damage reduction but should also include consideration of potential enhancement of existing landscape. The Applicant shall recommend mitigation measures to minimize the adverse effects identified above, including provision of a landscape design.

3.3.8.6 Parties shall be identified for the on-going management and maintenance of the proposed mitigation works to ensure their effectiveness throughout the operation phase of the Project. A practical programme and funding proposal for the implementation of the recommended measures shall be provided.

3.3.8.7 Coloured perspective drawings, plans and section/elevation diagrams, annotated oblique aerial photographs and computer-generated photomontage shall be adopted to fully illustrate the landscape and visual impacts of the Project. All computer graphics shall be compatible with Microstation DGN file format. The Applicant shall record the technical details such as system set-up, software, data files and function in preparing the illustration, which may need to be submitted for verification of the accuracy of the illustrations.

3.3.9 Impact on Cultural Heritage

3.3.9.1 The Applicant shall follow the criteria and guidelines for evaluating and assessing the cultural heritage impacts as stated in Annexes 10 and 19 of the TM, respectively.

3.3.9.2 The EIA study shall establish a comprehensive inventory of archaeological sites within or in close proximity to the project area, that might have the potential to be affected. The inventory shall be agreed by the Director. A master layout plan showing the location of both the proposed works and all sites of cultural heritage identified is required. Besides, a cross-reference of all check list including all the affected sites of cultural heritage, direct and indirect impacts identified, recommended mitigation measures as well as the implementation agent and period shall also be included in the EIA report.

3.3.9.3 A Marine Archaeological Investigation (MAI) on the area of the seabed to be affected by the Project should be carried out to assess the marine archaeological value of the area. Guidelines for the MAI is attached in Annex I. The study area for the purpose of the impact on marine archaeological deposit shall be defined as the area within 10m on each side of the alignment of the pipeline. The MAI should be conducted by a qualified marine archaeologist.

3.3.9.4 The Applicant shall avoid or minimize disturbance to the Sha Chau Archaeological Site and Ha Law Wan Archaeological Site. If excavation work is required in these two sites, an archaeological survey should be carried out.

3.3.9.5 The Applicant shall assess the extent to which those sites of cultural heritage might be affected and recommend possible alternatives (such as modification of pipeline alignment) and practicable monitoring and mitigation measures to avoid or keep the adverse impacts on the site of cultural heritage to an absolute minimum.

3.3.10 Hazard To Life

3.3.10.1 The risk to the life, including the workers of nearby plants, due to marine transport, jetty transfer, tank farm storage and pipeline transfer of aviation fuel shall be assessed. The Applicant shall follow the criteria for evaluating hazard to life as stated in Annexes 4 and 22 of the TM in conducting hazard assessment and include the following in the assessment:

(i) identification of all hazardous scenarios associated with the marine transport, jetty transfer, tank farm storage and pipeline transfer of aviation fuel, which may cause fatalities;

(ii) execution of a Quantitative Risk Assessment expressing population risks in both individual and societal term;

(iii) comparison of individual and societal risks with the Criteria for Evaluating Hazard to Life stipulated in Annex 4 of the TM; and

(iv) identification and assessment of practicable and cost effective risk mitigation measures as appropriate.

3.3.11 Risk Assessment on Fuel Spillage

3.3.11.1 The risk to all environmental sensitive receivers, especially the marine habitats, due to fuel spillage shall be assessed. The assessment shall include the followings:

(i) identification of all fuel spillage scenarios associated with the transportation and storage of aviation fuel and the impact on all environmental sensitive receivers by taking reference to results of the fuel spill modelling carried out in 3.3.5.3;

(ii) prediction and quantification of the impacts on the sensitive receiver due to fuel spillage scenarios identified in (i). The prediction shall take into account and include likely different operation stages/capacities.

(iii) derive an emergency contingency plan for the operational phase of the project with an aim to contain and remove all accidental spillage in short notice and to prevent and or to minimize the quantities of contaminants from reaching the environmental sensitive receivers, such as Chinese White Dolphin.

3.3.12 Fisheries Impact

3.3.12.1 Fisheries Impact Assessment shall follow the criteria and guidelines as specified in Annexes 9 and 17 of the TM respectively. The assessment shall review and collate existing information to provide adequate and accurate data for prediction and evaluation of impacts of the proposed developments on fisheries. The assessment shall include the following:

(i) description of the physical environmental background;

(ii) description and quantification as far as possible of the existing fisheries activities,

(iii) identification of parameters and area that are important to fisheries;

(iii) identification and quantification as far as possible of any direct/indirect and on-site/off-site impacts to fisheries;

(iv) the Applicant shall make proposals for any practicable alternatives or mitigation measures to prevent/minimize adverse impacts on fisheries;

3.3.13 Land Contamination Impact

3.3.13.1 To prevent contamination problems arising from the future operation of the proposed aviation fuel facility, in accordance with ProPECC Practice Note No. 3/94 "Contaminated Land Assessment and Remediation", the Applicant shall :

(i) identify the possible sources of contamination in the operational phase of the proposed aviation fuel facility; and

(ii) formulate appropriate operational practices, waste management strategies and precautionary measures to be implemented on site for prevention of contamination problems when it becomes operational.

3.3.14 Summary of Environmental Outcomes

The EIA report shall contain a summary of the key environmental outcomes arising from the EIA study, including the population and environmentally sensitive areas protected, environmentally friendly designs recommended, key environmental problems avoided, compensation areas included and the environmental benefits of environmental protection measures recommended.

3.3.15 Environmental Monitoring and Audit (EM&A) Requirements

3.3.15.1 The Applicant shall identify and justify in the EIA study whether there is any need for EM&A activities during the construction and operation phases of the Project and, if affirmative, to define the scope of the EM&A requirements for the Project in the EIA study.

3.3.15.2 Subject to the confirmation of the EIA study findings, the Applicant shall comply with the requirements as stipulated in Annex 21 of the TM. The Applicant shall also propose real-time reporting of monitoring data for the Project through a dedicated internet website.

3.3.15.3 The Applicant shall prepare a project implementation schedule containing all the EIA study recommendations and mitigation measures with reference to the implementation programme.

4. DURATION OF VALIDITY

4.1 This EIA study brief is valid for 24 months after the date of issue. If the EIA study does not commence within this period, the Applicant shall apply to the Director for a fresh EIA study brief before commencement of the EIA study.

5. REPORT REQUIREMENTS

5.1 In preparing the EIA report, the Applicant shall refer to Annex 11 of the TM for the contents of an EIA report. The Applicant shall also refer to Annex 20 of the TM, which stipulates the guidelines for the review of an EIA report.

5.2 The Applicant shall supply the Director with the following number of copies of the EIA report and the executive summary:

(i) 50 copies of the EIA report in English and 80 copies of the executive summary (each bilingual in both English and Chinese) as required under section 6(2) of the EIAO to be supplied at the time of application for approval of the EIA report.

(ii) when necessary, addendum to the EIA report and the executive summary submitted in 5.2 (i) above as required under section 7(1) of the EIAO, to be supplied upon advice by the Director for public inspection.

(iii) 20 copies of the EIA report in English and 50 copies of the executive summary (each bilingual in both English and Chinese) with or without Addendum as required under section 7(5) of the EIAO, to be supplied upon advice by the Director for consultation with the Advisory Council on the Environment.

5.3 The Applicant shall, upon request, make additional copies of the above documents available to the public, subject to payment by the interested parties of full costs of printing.

5.4 In addition, to facilitate the public inspection of the EIA Report via the EIAO Internet Website, the applicant shall provide electronic copies of both the EIA Report and the Executive Summary Report prepared in HyperText Markup Language (HTML) (version 4.0 or later) and in Portable Document Format (PDF version 4.0 or later), unless otherwise agreed by the Director. For the HTML version, a content page capable of providing hyperlink to each section and sub-section of the EIA Report and the Executive Summary Report shall be included in the beginning of the document. Hyperlinks to all figures, drawings and tables in the EIA Report and Executive Summary shall be provided in the main text from where the respective references are made. All graphics in the report shall be in interlaced GIF format unless otherwise agreed by the Director.

5.5 The electronic copies of the EIA report and the Executive Summary shall be submitted to the Director at the time of application for approval of the EIA Report.

5.6 When the EIA Report and the Executive Summary are made available for public inspection under s.7(1) of the EIAO, the content of the electronic copies of the EIA Report and the Executive Summary must be the same as the hard copies and the Director shall be provided with the most updated electronic copies.

5.7 To promote environmentally friendly and efficient dissemination of information, both hardcopies and electronic copies of future EM&A reports recommended by the EIA study shall be required and their format shall be agreed by the Director.

6. OTHER PROCEDURAL REQUIREMENTS

6.1 If there is any change in the name of Applicant for this EIA study brief during the course of the EIA study, the Applicant must notify the Director immediately.

6.2 If there is any key change in the scope of the Project mentioned in Sections 1.2, 1.3 and 1.4 of this EIA study brief and in Project Profile (No. PP-124/2001), the Applicant must seek confirmation from the Director in writing on whether or not the scope of issues covered by this EIA study brief can still cover the key changes, and the additional issues, if any, that the EIA study must also address. If the changes to the Project fundamentally alter the key scope of the EIA study brief, the Applicant shall apply to the Director for a fresh EIA study brief.

--- END OF EIA STUDY BRIEF ---

May 2001
Environmental Assessment and Noise Division,
Environmental Protection Department

Annex I - Guidelines for Marine Archaeological Investigation (MAI)

The Standard practice for MAI should consist of four separate tasks, ie. (1) Baseline Review, (2) Geophysical Survey, (3) Establishing Archaeological Potential and (4) Remote Operated Vehicle (ROV)/Visual Diver Survey/Watching Brief.

(1) Baseline Review

1.1 A baseline review should be conducted to collate the existing information in order to identify the potential for archaeological resources and, if identified, their likely character, extent, quality and value.

1.2 The baseline review will focus on known sources of archive data. It will include :

(a) Geotechnical Engineering Office (GEO) - the Department holds extensive seabed survey data collected from previous geological research.

(b) Marine Department, Hydrographic Office - the Department holds a substantial archive of hydrographic data and charts.

(c) The Royal Naval Hydrographic Department in the UK - the Department maintains an archive of all survey data collected by naval hydrographers.

1.3 The above data sources will provide historical records and more detailed geological analysis of submarine features which may have been subsequently masked by more recent sediment deposits and accumulated debris.

(2) Geophysical Survey

2.1 Extensive geophysical survey of the study area should deploy high resolution boomer, side scan sonar and an echo sounder. The data received from the survey would be analyzed in detail to provide :

(a) Exact definition of the areas of greatest archaeological potential.

(b) Assessment of the depth and nature of the seabed sediments to define which areas consist of suitable material to bury and preserve archaeological material.

(c) Detailed examination of the boomer and side scan sonar records to map anomalies on the seabed which may be archaeological material.

(3) Establishing Archaeological Potential

3.1 The data examined during Task 1 and 2 will be analysed to provide an indication of the likely character an extent of a strategy for investigation.

3.2 The results would be presented as a written report and charts. If there is no indication of archaeological material there would be no need for further work.

(4) Remote Operated Vehicle (ROV)/Visual Diver Survey/Watching Brief

4.1 Subject to the outcome of Task 1, 2 and 3, accepted marine archaeological practice would be to plan a field evaluation programme to acquire more detailed data on areas identified as having archaeological potential. The areas of archaeological interest can be inspected by ROV or divers. ROV or a team of divers with both still and video cameras would be used to record all seabed features of archaeological interest.

4.2 Owing to the heavy marine traffic in Hong Kong, the ROV/visual diver survey may not be feasible to achieve the target. If that is the case, an archaeological watching brief is the most appropriate way to monitor the dredging operations in areas of identified high potential to obtain physical archaeological information.

4.3 A sampling strategy for an archaeological watching brief would be prepared based on the results of Task 1, 2 and 3 to focus work on the areas of greatest archaeological potential. Careful monitoring of the dredging operations would enable immediate identification and salvage of archaeological material. If archaeological materials is found, the AMO should be contacted immediately to seek guidance on its significance and appropriate mitigation measures would be prepared.

(5) Report

5.1 If Task 4 is undertaken, the results would be presented in a written report with charts.